Framing is the least well-developed central concept of prospect theory. Framing is both fundamental to prospect theory and remarkably underdeveloped in the prospect theory literature. This paper focuses on the many subtypes and variations of framing: thematic vs. evaluative; successful vs. failed; productive vs. counterproductive; purposeful, structural and interactive framing; counterframing; loss frames vs. gain frames; revolving framing vs. sequential framing; framing by a third party; and framing vs. priming. The bulk of the paper provides an analysis of framing and framing effects in foreign policy settings with an emphasis on U.S. foreign policy. We highlight framing effects during the Cold War, the Persian Gulf War, the current ``war on terrorism'', and other IR/foreign policy settings. Our examination highlights the extent to which presidents and other significant world leaders use framing to shape policy debates and national security choices.

Framing effects in international relations

In all President George W. Bush made three nominations to the Supreme Court: John Roberts, Harriet Miers, and Samuel Alito. I suggest that a key factor in the selection of each of these nominees was their stance on the issue of executive authority and the war on terrorism. While evidence suggests that on a number of issues Miers was a very different nominee, or at least a potentially very different nominee, from Roberts and Alito, I submit that on the issue of executive authority all three were seen by the Bush administration as reliable votes for the New Paradigm or Unitary Executive theory of government. In the following paper I conduct a content analysis of Alito's senate confirmation hearing. Did the Senate make the issue a priority? Was the issue treated in a partisan fashion? Was the nominee forthcoming or evasive in his responses on the topic? In order to answer these queries, I employ a content analysis of the questioning behavior of the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Recent news accounts of warrantless wiretapping and torture increased the issue's value as senators used executive-authority exchanges to signal constituents and score points with their colleagues. I find that of the substantive issues discussed, executive authority matters were addressed as much as abortion and both outpaced all other substantive issues that were raised. Furthermore, executive authority issues were treated in a partisan fashion with Democrats far more likely to raise the issue than Republicans and far more likely to be skeptical and critical in their remarks then their GOP colleagues who were almost always positive and supportive of the Bush administration and the nominee. Ultimately, my results provide support for recent studies that suggest senators engage in strategic and partisan behavior in the confirmation process.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID1080083_code923316.pdf?abstractid=1080083&mirid=2

'Overly Deferential to Executive Power:' Partisanship and Evasiveness in Justice Samuel Alito's Confirmation Hearing

: Forecasts often involve judgments about "ill-structured" problems that lack an optimal solution or agreement about boundary conditions. This paper describes how the degree of structure of the problem and the forecasting time frame can be used to form a classification scheme of different types of forecasting problems. This scheme can be used as a guide for choosing the most appropriate approach and methods to use in analyses and predictions. The paper next describes a method for summarizing how individuals or groups of problem solvers analyze "ill-structured" social and political problems. Examples of this method, based on the construction of free-hand causal diagrams of novice and expert political forecasters, are presented. Experience to date using these schematic summaries indicate that such summaries are useful for understanding the reasoning processes of clients and to check the reasoning process used by experts from different backgrounds and experiences in making forecasts.

Problem representation and variation in the forecasts of 'political experts'

A Problem-Solving Perspective on Decision-Making Processes and Political Strategies in Committees: The Case of Controversial Supreme Court Justice Nomination Hearings

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

A Problem-Solving Perspective on Decision-Making Processes and Political Strategies in Committees: The Case of Controversial Supreme Court Justice Nomination Hearings

Chat with Paper

AI Agents for this Paper

Citations

Framing effects in international relations

'Overly Deferential to Executive Power:' Partisanship and Evasiveness in Justice Samuel Alito's Confirmation Hearing

Problem representation and variation in the forecasts of 'political experts'

Related Papers (5)

A contractual model of the voting behavior of the supreme court: The role of the chief justice

Why Should Public Hearings in the Brazilian Supreme Court be Understood as an Innovative Democratic Tool in Constitutional Adjudication

Judicial independence and the supreme court of canada

Toward A Positive Theory of State Supreme Court Decision Making

Governing from the Bench: The Supreme Court of Canada and the Judicial Role